#140 – Adventures in Jungian Typology

John Beebe, M.D., is a Jungian analyst in practice in San Francisco. He received degrees from Harvard College and the University of Chicago medical school. He is a past President of the C.G. Jung Institute of San Francisco, where he is currently on the teaching faculty, as well as Assistant Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of California Medical School, San Francisco. He is a Distinguished Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association.

A popular lecturer in the Jungian world, Dr. Beebe has spoken on topics related to the theory and practical applications of analytical psychology to professional and lay audiences throughout the United States as well as in Canada, China, Denmark, England, France, Italy, Germany, Israel, Mexico, and Switzerland. Dr. Beebe is the Founding Editor of The San Francisco Jung Institute Library Journal, a quarterly of reviews with an international readership, and he was the first American co-editor of the London-based Journal of Analytical Psychology.

Dr. Beebe has contributed many book chapters and published in a wide range of journals. For eample, with Donald Sandner, he is the author of “Psychopathology and Analysis,” an article on Jungian complex theory used in many training programs, and with Thomas Kirsch and Joe Cambray the author of “What Freudians Can Learn from Jung.” Dr. Beebe is the author of the book Integrity in Depth, a study of the archetype of integrity.

An avid film buff, Beebe frequently draws upon American movies to illustrate how the various types of consciousness and unconsciousness interact to produce images of Self and shadow in the stories of our lives that Jung called individuation. Dr. Beebe is particularly well known for his elaboration in C.G. Jung’s theory of psychological types.

Dr. Beebe’s reviews and articles about movies have reached a wide audience. Following up on Jung’s theory of psychological types, Beebe developed an archetypal model of a dialogical self wherein conscious functions contend with functions in the shadow. A person’s superior (preferred] function is the hero (or heroine), most closely allied with a semi-conscious function called the anima (or animus). An auxiliary function (the good parent) may be counteracted by a shadowy Witch/Senex function, and a child-like tertiary function by a more juvenile Trickster. The Anima may find itself forced to compete with a demonic personality function which threatens to destroy it.

hi i read some articles and i am very glad. i am working on Yung theories in Nathaniel Hawtorne’s The Scarlet Letter as my MA thesis.i realy like to know ur suggestion and help.please send me ur messages to my e-mail.

The jungian typology has a new generation questionnaire : the IJTI-Process instrument.
This intrument is available in French, in German and, of course in English.
For those who want to learn more about jungian typology and become a certified IJTI-Process practitioner, please fell free to contact Neil BOWDEN : ott.partners@yahoo.co.uk

Something I’ve been trying to work out for sometime is what kind of typology the Anima/Animus has. It’s noted that we tend to have ‘love at first sight’ for people who seemingly correspond to our own Anima image, but what type would this be (especially looking at human relationships and Anima projections)?

Is it likely to be the same typology as our physically awake selves (I’m INTJ for instance, is my Anima INTJ)?

As the Anima is part of the unconscious, is it made of functions that are currently unconscious (say ESFP in my case)?

Or is it completely unique to each individual, regardless of typology, and can’t really be fathomed in such terms?

This response is directed to John Knight, whose question is further along.

John, I’ve been working with Dr. Beebe’s theories for some time. Beebe has a very different perspective on the anima/animus than most traditional Jungians do, and it is his own elaboration on Jung’s model. In the many years I’ve been working with Beebe’s model, I’ve found it to be extraordinary. I often draw upon it in my coaching and self-discovery work, and my clients report fantastic insights.

The anima/animus archetype is affiliated with the inferior function of the personality, which is the opposite of the superior function — in an INTJ’s case, this will be extraverted Sensation. Accordingly, INTJs may idealize and be attracted to people with superior extraverted Sensation; i.e., someone with ESFP preferences.

Where Beebe differs from traditional Jungians is that traditionalist lump the “shadow” in with the anima/animus, whereas Beebe separates the Shadow out, and even “types”; the unconscious (ego-dystonic) functions. So you will find a great deal more specificity with Beebe’s model. This makes the model seem more complex, but it is sooo much more satisfying to work at that level of detail.

Naturally every person is going to have a different anima/animus manifestation within the model — I would direct you to your own active imagination work to discern yours. It sometimes reveals itself as a “mysterious stranger”.

However, Beebe has also said that any archetype can be sexualized, so if it\’s a sexual attraction you’re wondering about, take care not to let that aspect of the archetype mislead you into assuming it is the anima/animus you have encountered. Some people sexualize the mother, the father, the child, the Trickster, etc. The anima/animus should have qualities of idealization about it beyond any sexual attraction.

I hope this helps you, John. Best of luck on your journey, and cheers!

A friend and I have just been going over this very ground, so this is extremely timely. Lately, my friend Aishling and I have been looking at the work of Marina Margaret Heiss, at typelogic.com, where types relating to your own are broken down, such as your likely counterpart, pedagogue, companion, etc. And she also happens to have Anima as the opposite functions of one’s own (ESFP in my case). I’m not sure psychometrics can be so explicit, but the idea fascinates me, particularly this typing of the unconscious and separation of shadow that you mentioned.

Could you point me in the direction of any of Beebe’s specific works?

Cheers!
John

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *